Feeding stimulants for pest control

ABSTRACT

A feeding stimulant release system includes a porous matrix with a feeding stimulant and a sustained-release agent. The porous matrix has at least one reservoir.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application Ser.No. 60/447,822, filed on Feb. 13, 2003, which is incorporated herein byreference in its entirety.

STATEMENT AS TO FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH

The work described herein was carried out, at least in part, using fundsfrom federal grant OGCA #97A0779 (Massachusetts Society for PromotingAgriculture), OGCA #101-1331 (USDA Pest Management AlternativesProgram), and OGCA #101-0805 (US EPA IR-4 Program). The U.S. Governmenttherefore has certain rights in the invention.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This invention relates to feeding stimulants, and more particularly tofeeding stimulants used for pest control.

BACKGROUND

Pests, such as apple maggot flies (AMF), can effect significant damageon commercial fruit production. Devices to attract and kill such pestsare well known. However, a concern related to such devices is theirenvironmental impact.

One such device uses an odor-baited sticky red sphere to attract andcapture pests (e.g., apple maggot flies). However, the sticky materialused to snare alighting flies is difficult to handle and requiresfrequent maintenance.

Thus, pesticide-treated spheres (PTS) were developed as a substitute forthe above sticky-coated spheres. A PTS is coated with a mixture ofinsecticide, fly-feeding stimulant, and residue-extending agent. Inconcept, pests land on a PTS, receive a toxic dose of insecticide, anddie. However, consistent lethality to pests can be assured only if thepests are strongly induced to feed upon the sphere surface and ingest avery small (but lethal) dose of insecticide. Thus, PTS must maintain adetectable residue of feeding stimulant (such as sucrose) associatedwith toxicant on the sphere surface. A major challenge facing the usersof such spheres has been how to continuously supply the sphere surfacewith enough sugar to stimulate fly feeding, thereby allowing PTS toachieve maximum toxicity to pests with a minimal dose of insecticide.

Two methods have been used in an attempt to solve this problem. Onemethod employs a reusable wooden PTS with an external source of feedingstimulant. The other method uses a disposable sugar/flour PTS whoseentire body consists of sugar and starches.

Different external sources of feeding stimulant can be used with thewooden PTS. One such external source is a sucrose-bearing top-capaffixed to each PTS which, during rainfall, releases a small amount ofsucrose onto the sphere surface. That is, ambient moisture causessurface sucrose to leach off of the cap and drip down onto the PTS.Thus, as surface sugar on the PTS dissipated under rainfall or heavydew, it was replaced with sucrose from a source atop the PTS.

Originally, the caps were made almost entirely of sucrose. However,since those compositions tended to break down too easily, aparaffin/sucrose combination replaced the original sucrose caps.Thereafter, flutes were added into the tops of the caps to promote theeven distribution of sucrose-bearing runoff from the surface of thesecaps.

SUMMARY

The invention is based on the discovery that if you create a cap as aporous matrix with at least one reservoir, and use that cap to supply afruit or nut mimic with pest-feeding stimulant, then you can create apest control system that utilizes, rather than avoids, environmentalmoisture, such as rain, humidity, and dew, to provide long-lasting pestcontrol.

In one aspect, the invention features a feeding stimulant release systemthat includes a porous matrix. The porous matrix includes awater-soluble or water-dispersible feeding stimulant, an insolublesustained-release agent, and at least one reservoir located on an uppersurface of the porous matrix. The feeding stimulant and the releaseagent comprise two homogenous phases dispersed in each other.

These and other embodiments may have one or more of the followingadvantages. The porous matrix exhibits enhanced efficiency indistribution of feeding stimulant. The porous matrix saves the user timespent on monitoring the feeding stimulant content on the surface of thefruit or nut mimic. The porous matrix is a relatively inexpensive andeasily replaceable component of a pest control system. The porous matrixalso increases the success rate of the fruit or nut mimic, in terms ofkilling target pests. The porous matrix can use a relatively smallamount of toxicant to achieve a relatively high pest mortality rate, andis relatively robust. For example, the porous matrix retains its shapeover relatively long periods of outdoor use.

Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used hereinhave the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill inthe art to which this invention belongs. Although methods and materialssimilar or equivalent to those described herein can be used in thepractice or testing of the present invention, suitable methods andmaterials are described below. All publications, patent applications,patents, and other references mentioned herein are incorporated byreference in their entirety. In case of conflict, the presentspecification, including definitions, will control. In addition, thematerials, methods, and examples are illustrative only and not intendedto be limiting.

The details of one or more embodiments of the invention are set forth inthe accompanying drawings and the description below. Other features andadvantages of the invention will be apparent from the following detaileddescription and drawings, and from the claims.

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a perspective view of an embodiment of a pest control system.

FIG. 2 is a cutaway view of an embodiment of a feeding stimulant matrix.

FIG. 3 is a side view of an embodiment of a feeding stimulant matrix.

FIG. 4 is an exploded view of an embodiment of a feeding stimulantmatrix.

FIG. 5 is a top view of an embodiment of a feeding stimulant matrix.

FIG. 6A is a perspective view of a second embodiment of a pest controlsystem.

FIG. 6B is a side cross-sectional view of the pest control system ofFIG. 6A.

FIG. 7A is a perspective view of an embodiment of a pest control system.

FIG. 7B is a side cross-sectional view of the pest control system ofFIG. 7A.

FIG. 7C is an exploded view of the pest control system of FIGS. 7A and7B.

FIG. 7D is a side cross-sectional view of a porous matrix from the pestcontrol system of FIGS. 7A-7C.

FIG. 8A is a side view of an embodiment of a pest control system.

FIG. 8B is a side cross-sectional view of the pest control system ofFIG. 8A.

Like reference symbols in the various drawings indicate like elements.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The invention is based on the discovery that if you create a cap as aporous matrix with at least one reservoir, and use that cap todistribute toxicant to pests and/or to supply a fruit or nut mimic withpest-feeding stimulant, then you can create a pest control system withlong-lasting effects. The porous matrix includes a feeding stimulant anda sustained-release agent. In some embodiments, the porous matrixfurther includes one or more toxicants. The fruit or nut mimic includesa mixture of feeding stimulant and residue-extending agent. In someembodiments, the fruit or nut mimic can include one or more toxicants(that can be different from, or the same as, the toxicant(s) in theporous matrix). If the porous matrix is suspended above the fruit or nutmimic, for example, ambient moisture collected in the reservoirs canleach through the porous matrix, causing feeding stimulant to drip fromthe porous matrix onto the fruit or nut mimic. Consequently, the fruitor nut mimic is continually refreshed with feeding stimulant for manyweeks to months, e.g., for the entire growing season. In someembodiments, the porous matrix can form a portion of the fruit or nutmimic (can be integral with the fruit or nut mimic shape). The porousmatrix can include a toxicant and a feeding stimulant that, along withthe shape and color of the fruit or nut mimic, attracts pests. The pestscan feed on the porous matrix and/or on the fruit or nut mimic, therebyingesting toxicant.

Structure

Pest Control System

FIGS. 1 and 6A show pest control systems 10, 100 that include a porousmatrix 12, 102 with one or more reservoirs 16, 108 and a fruit or nutmimic 14, 106.

Fruit or Nut Mimic

The fruit or nut mimic 14 is a wooden or plastic structure, e.g., asphere. Fruit or nut mimic 14 can have a coating that contains a mixtureof a toxicant such as an insecticide (e.g., imidacloprid, thiacloprid,spinosad, avermectin, thiamethoxam, indoxacarb, phloxine dye,dimethoate, azinphosmethyl, diazinon, malathion, permethrin, methomyl),and/or feeding stimulant (e.g., sucrose, fructose, glucose, molasses,corn syrup, maltodextrins, corn flour, gluten), and/or residue-extendingagent (e.g., latex paint). For example, fruit or nut mimic 14 can have acoating that includes a residue-extending agent, without including atoxicant or a feeding stimulant. The residue-extending agent can enhancethe long-term efficacy of toxicant on the fruit or nut mimic by, forexample, protecting the toxicant from exposure to rainfall.

The shape and color of a fruit or nut mimic depends on the relevantfruit or nut to be protected from pests. For example, a blueberry mimicis a comparatively large red or green sphere, with a diameter of about 9cm. Apple mimics are spheres with a diameter of about 9 cm, colored redor black to capitalize on the visual spectrum maximally attractive toapple maggot flies. The shape of mimics applicable to tropical fruit andcitrus species depends on the protected crop and targeted pest, butcommonly used shapes include spheres (with a diameter of about 6-10 cm)and rectangles. Mimic traps used in the monitoring and protection ofwalnuts are dark green spheres with a diameter of about 9 cm.

Targeted pests include any pests which can be attracted to feed, forage,or lay eggs on the attached mimic by visual or chemical stimuli and canbe controlled by the toxicants used in the device or the attacheddevices (e.g., apple maggot flies, blueberry fruit flies, Caribbeanfruit flies, Mediterranean fruit flies, oriental fruit flies, olivefruit flies, walnut husk flies, house flies, cherry fruit flies, melonfruit flies, Mexican fruit flies, beetles, moths, wasps, andcockroaches).

Porous Matrix

The porous matrix 12 is made of a combination of a feeding stimulant(e.g., sucrose, fructose, glucose, molasses, corn syrup, maltodextrins,corn flour, gluten) and a sustained-release agent (e.g., paraffin wax,carnauba wax, beeswax, Japan wax, montan wax, ceresin wax). The feedingstimulant forms approximately 65-90%, e.g., 75-85%, of the porousmatrix, while the sustained-release agent forms about 10-35%, e.g.,15-25%, of the matrix. The sustained-release agent may be 100% paraffinwax, for example. In some embodiments, the sustained-release agent is acombination of paraffin and carnauba wax, the ratio of paraffin tocarnauba wax being between about 0.5:1.0 and 4.0:1.0, e.g., betweenabout 1.0:1.0 and 3.0:1.0. An advantage to using a combination ofcarnauba wax and paraffin wax as the sustained-release agent is that theporous matrix may exhibit better resistance to heat degradation relativeto a porous matrix made only of paraffin wax, since carnauba wax has ahigher melting point than paraffin wax. The porosity of thesustained-release agent depends on the amount of sustained-release agentused and on the density at which the porous matrix is formed.

The porous matrix may be a disk or “cap,” i.e., it may be in the shapeof a compressed cylinder. In some cases, the side of the porous matrixthat is closest to the fruit or nut mimic is carved or concave to form atighter fit with the fruit or nut mimic. For example, if the fruit ornut mimic is spherical, then one side of the porous matrix (i.e., the“bottom side”) may be somewhat concave to better fit the sphere. In somecases, the top side and/or the bottom side of the porous matrix isplanar. The porous matrix has a mass of between about 25 and 200 grams,e.g., between about 75 and 150 grams. The mass of the porous matrix willdepend to some extent on the targeted pest, and the size of the mimic.

As FIG. 2 shows, porous matrix 12 has one or more reservoirs 16, forrain water, dew, and condensation, on its top side 18, i.e., the sidethat faces away from the fruit or nut mimic 14 when the porous matrix issuspended over the fruit or nut mimic. Because of the reservoirs and theporosity of the matrix, water can run both over the surface of andthrough the porous matrix, thereby coming into contact with a greateramount of feeding stimulant than it would if it just ran over thesurface of the matrix. The reservoirs 16 are relatively shallow. Theporous matrix has a diameter of, for example, between about 3 and 10 cm,e.g., between about 5.5 and 8 cm, and a depth of between about 2.0 and7.0 cm, e.g., between about 2.5 and 5.5 cm. The reservoir or reservoirs,on the other hand, have a depth of between about 0.25 and 6 mm, e.g.,between about 0.75 and 4.5 mm. These dimensions can be altered to fitthe specific mimic and pest.

The porous matrix 12 can further define a cylindrical bore 20 throughits center region. The cylindrical bore 20 is suitable for attaching ahanging apparatus to the porous matrix when the porous matrix is part ofa pest control system as described above and is, for example, suspendedfrom a tree. If present, bore 20 can also be used to connect porousmatrix 12 to mimic 14.

FIG. 3 shows how the reservoirs 16, which have a depth D_(r), are notparticularly deep, relative to the thickness T_(p) of the porous matrix12. The reservoirs gather ambient moisture, such as rain, dew, and othercondensed water from the air. The water then leaches through the porousmatrix or over the sides of the porous matrix, eventually streaming ontothe fruit or nut mimic at an even, steady rate (e.g., drop by drop).

FIG. 2 shows one embodiment of a porous matrix 12, the embodiment havingpie-shaped reservoirs. For example, the porous matrix can have betweenfour and twelve, e.g., between six and ten, reservoirs. These reservoirscan be created by standard techniques, e.g., by stamping, pressing,cutting, or scraping the top of the matrix, or can be molded when thematrix is created. Alternatively, the reservoirs can be created byplacing a rim, e.g., of plastic or metal, onto the top of the matrix tocreate one or more-reservoirs. For example, this rim can be in the shapeof a wheel and spokes.

Dye in the Porous Matrix

The porous matrix may include a dye, e.g., a water-soluble,vegetable-based dye, that will leach out of the porous matrix over theduration of use of the matrix. For example, the dye could be a greendye, in the case of a porous matrix used atop a blueberry mimic. Asambient moisture streams through the porous matrix over time, the dyegradually leaches out of the matrix, so that the matrix fades andeventually loses its color entirely, e.g., turning white. Such a loss ofcolor can be used to indicate to the user that the porous matrix is nolonger active.

Toxicant in Porous Matrix

In some cases, the porous matrix 12 may include a toxicant. In suchcases, both the porous matrix and the fruit or nut mimic may include atoxicant. The toxicant in the porous matrix maybe the same as that inthe fruit or nut mimic, so that the porous matrix refreshes the mimic'stoxicant content, in addition to its feeding stimulant content.Alternatively, the toxicant in the porous matrix may be different fromthe toxicant in the fruit or nut mimic. In some cases, the porous matrixmay include a toxicant, while the fruit or nut mimic does not contain atoxicant. Examples of toxicants include insecticides, such asimidacloprid, thiacloprid, spinosad, avermectin, thiamethoxam,indoxacarb, phloxine dye, dimethoate, azinphosmethyl, diazinon,malathion, permethrin, and methomyl.

Mesh Guard on Porous Matrix

FIGS. 4-5 show how in some cases, porous matrix 12 includes a mesh guard22 that surrounds the porous matrix. The mesh guard includes a topportion 24 and a side portion 26. The mesh guard 22 can be made of metalor plastic, for example. The mesh guard may be made out of ⅛″ grid wire,for example. The mesh guard can protect the porous matrix from beingattacked and/or eaten by animals other than the targeted pests. Forexample, the mesh guard can prevent the porous matrix from beingdestroyed by rodents when the target pest is apple maggot flies.

Other Embodiments of the Pest Control System

The new pest control systems can include a fruit or nut mimic that ispartially formed of a porous matrix. Referring to FIGS. 6A and 6B, apest control system 100 includes a porous matrix 102 that is attached toa hollow bottom hemispherical portion 104 (e.g., formed of plastic orwood). Hemispherical portion 104 includes a central rod 105 that helpsthe hemispherical portion to keep its shape (e.g., prevents thehemispherical portion from collapsing). In FIGS. 6A and 6B, porousmatrix 102 and bottom portion 104 together form a generally sphericalfruit or nut mimic 106, but other shapes are possible. Reservoirs 108 inthe top of porous matrix 102 can help to collect ambient moisture anddistribute it throughout porous matrix 102. Porous matrix 102 caninclude one or more toxicants (e.g., spinosad, available from DowAgroSciences under the trade name Entrust 80WP®). As moisture isdistributed throughout porous matrix 102, the moisture causes toxicantand/or feeding stimulant within porous matrix 102 to come to the surface110 of the porous matrix and/or to drip onto bottom portion 104. Ahanger 112 that is attached to porous matrix 102 can be used, forexample, to hang pest control system 100 from a tree. Pests that areattracted to pest control system 100 can feed on either or both ofporous matrix 102 and hemispherical portion 104.

In certain embodiments, a pest control system can include one reservoir,and/or one or more reservoirs that have a non-triangular shape.Referring to FIGS. 7A-7D, a pest control system 200 includes a hanger201, a porous matrix 202, and a hollow bottom hemispherical portion 204.Hemispherical portion 204 includes a central rod 205 that helps thehemispherical portion to keep its shape (e.g., prevents thehemispherical portion from collapsing). As FIG. 7C shows, porous matrix202 is attached to the top portion 203 of hemispherical portion 204.Porous matrix 202 and hemispherical portion 204, which are attached at aboundary 206 (shown in FIGS. 7A (in phantom) and in FIG. 7C), form agenerally spherical fruit or nut mimic 208. As shown in FIG. 7D, porousmatrix 202 has a hemispherical shape with a base diameter “BD” of fromabout 5.0 cm to about 9.0 cm (e.g., about 7.5 cm, about 8.0 cm), and aheight “H” of from about 1.0 cm to about 4.5 cm (e.g., about 2.0 cm,about 2.5 cm). Porous matrix 202 includes one or more toxicants, inaddition to a feeding stimulant and a sustained release agent. While theporous matrices shown above include multiple reservoirs, porous matrix202 has one reservoir 210, which has a concave shape. Reservoir 210 canhold from about 0.1 mL to about 5 mL of water (e.g., about 1 mL ofwater). Ambient moisture can collect in reservoir 210, and can flowthrough porous matrix 202, distributing toxicant and/or feedingstimulant to the surface of the porous matrix. Pests that are attractedto pest control system 200 can feed on either or both of porous matrix202 and hemispherical portion 204.

Porous matrix 102 and/or porous matrix 202 can include components in oneor more of the following amounts. In some embodiments, a porous matrixcan include from about 0.01 weight percent to about 5.0 weight percent(e.g., about 0.10 weight percent) toxicant. A porous matrix can includefrom about 40.0 weight percent to about 90.0 weight percent (e.g.,79.625 weight percent) feeding stimulant (e.g., sugar). A porous matrixcan include from about 0.05 weight percent to about 2.00 weight percent(e.g., about 0.25 weight percent) food coloring agent (e.g., red orgreen food coloring agent). In some embodiments, a porous matrix caninclude up to about 40.0 weight percent (e.g., about 9.75 weightpercent) paraffin wax and/or carnauba wax. A porous matrix can includefrom about 0.05 weight percent to about 2.00 weight percent (e.g., about0.50 weight percent) candlemaker's dye.

Porous matrix 102 and/or porous matrix 202 can have a mass of from about60 grams to about 250 grams (e.g., about 87 grams), and/or a volume offrom about 45 cm³ to about 190 cm³ (e.g., about 68 cm³), and/or adensity of from about 1.00 g/cm³ to about 1.5 g/cm³ (e.g., about 1.28g/cm³).

The feeding stimulant in porous matrix 102 and/or porous matrix 202 canbe dyed (e.g., with a food coloring agent). Alternatively oradditionally, the sustained release agent in porous matrix 102 and/orporous matrix 202 can be dyed (e.g., with a color that matches the foodcoloring agent in the feeding stimulant). In some embodiments, thesustained release agent can be dyed using candlemaker's dye.

Hemispherical portions 104 and 204 can be formed of, for example,plastic, wood, and/or metal. The hemispherical portions and porousmatrices 102 and 202 can be dyed to match, so that the overall fruit ornut mimic is of a consistent color. In some embodiments, hemisphericalportions 104 and 204 can have coating (e.g., a coating that includes ared paint (e.g., latex paint), and/or that includes a toxicant that isthe same as, or different from, a toxicant in porous matrix 102 orporous matrix 202).

In some embodiments, a pest control system can include a porous matrixthat is formed into the shape of a fruit or nut mimic. For example,FIGS. 8A and 8B show a generally spherical Suit or nut mimic 300 with ahanger 301 and a hollow center portion 302. Mimic 300 is formed of afeeding stimulant, a sustained release agent, a coloring agent, and atoxicant. Mimic 300 has a thickness “T” of from about 1 cm to about 5 cm(e.g., about 2 cm, about 2.5 cm). Hollow center portion has a diameterof from about 2 cm to about 7 cm (e.g., about 5 cm). Mimic 300 can beformed, for example, by injection molding. In some embodiments, mimic300 can be formed by forming two separate hemispheres (e.g., byinjection molding and/or by hydraulic pressure) and attaching the twohemispheres to each other (e.g., with an adhesive) to form the mimic.

Method of Making

A porous matrix 12 can be formed in the following way. Feeding stimulantand a dye or dye agent (such as food coloring) are dissolved in asolvent (such as water). In certain embodiments, one or more toxicantscan also be added to the solvent. The mixture is then heated, and themolten mixture is poured off. While it is cooling, the mixture isagitated. The resultant granular mixture is later crushed to form apowder (and periodically stirred to prevent clumping). Thereafter, asustained-release agent (such as wax) is melted and then folded into themixture in a heated glass bowl. The mixture is then stirred until cool,and a small amount of dry mineral clay is added to the powdered mixtureto prevent clumping (approximately 0.5%-1.0% by weight of the finalmixture). In some embodiments, one or more toxicants can be added to themixture as it is cooling and/or after it has been cooled. Using ahydraulic arbor press, the resulting coarse powder is then pressed by apiston head into a compression cylinder. The result is a cylindricalporous matrix with a concave base. The piston head can also be used topress reservoirs into the porous matrix. The final product is thenejected from the base of the compression cylinder.

If it is desired to add a mesh guard to the porous matrix, then prior tothe use of the hydraulic arbor press, wire cloth is sleeved inside thecompression cylinder. The powdered mixture is then placed into thecompression cylinder and piston pressure is applied (as above). The wiremesh is thereby implanted into the outer layer of the finishedcylindrical porous matrix. The final product is then ejected from thebase of the compression cylinder.

A porous matrix 102 or 202 can be formed in the following way.

Feeding stimulant and dye or dye agent (such as food coloring) isdissolved in a solvent (such as water) to form a solution. In someembodiments, one or more toxicants can also be added to the solution.The mixture is then heated, and the molten mixture is poured off (e.g.,onto a steel grid). While it is cooling, the mixture is stirred. Theresulting mixture is then crushed (e.g., using a pestle) to a coarsepowder. Wax (e.g., paraffin wax and/or carnauba wax) is then heated andmelted (e.g., co-melted), and dye is added to the molten wax. The moltenwax is then poured over the feeding stimulant mixture and stirred untilcool. Toxicant is stirred into the cooled mixture, and the mixture (and,optionally, a rodent guard) are placed into a compression cylinder witha concave base. Using a hydraulic press, a piston head is pushed intothe compression cylinder to form a dome-shaped porous matrix, which isthen ejected from the concave base. One or more reservoirs can be addedto the top of the porous matrix after ejection (e.g., by drilling).Alternatively or additionally, one or more reservoirs can be added tothe top of the porous matrix during the compression process (e.g., usingthe piston head).

Method of Using

After the porous matrix is formed, it may be used in a pest controlsystem. For example, if the targeted pests are apple maggot flies, thenthe porous matrix may be connected to an apple mimic (generally, a redimidacloprid-treated sphere), and the whole pest control system may besuspended in a tree in an orchard. Apple maggot flies, attracted to theapple mimic and its feeding stimulant, will land on the mimic, ingestsome of the toxicant on the surface, and die shortly thereafter.Meanwhile, ambient moisture will collect in the reservoirs and leachthrough the porous matrix or run down the sides of the porous matrix,causing the porous matrix to release droplets, e.g., in a steady orsubstantially steady stream, of feeding stimulant onto the apple mimic.In this way, the apple mimic is continually refreshed with new feedingstimulant, so that it can continue to attract large numbers of applemaggot flies. If there is a dye within the porous matrix, then the dyewill gradually leach out of the matrix as ambient moisture moves throughthe matrix's pores. Consequently, the color of the porous matrix willfade, which can be used as an indication to the user that it is time toreplace the porous matrix.

EXAMPLES

The following examples are intended as illustrative and non-limiting.

Example 1A

A porous matrix was made in the following way:

20 ml water were brought to a boil, and 0.5 ml concentrated foodcoloring was added. 78.5 g sucrose were dissolved in the boilingmixture. The mixture was heated to 151° C. (without agitation) to reachthe “hard crack” stage of molten sucrose.

The molten mixture was poured off and continuously agitated for 2minutes to break up forming crystals. The resultant granular mixture waspestled to coarse powder and stirred periodically to prevent clumping.

10 g petroleum paraffin and 10 g carnauba wax were melted together andheated to 110° C.

20 g molten paraffin/carnauba wax-mixture were added to 80 g roomtemperature, powdered sucrose/dye/clay mixture in a heated (60° C.)glass bowl to prevent uneven cooling at the sides.

The molten wax mixture was folded into the powdered sucrose mixture andstirred until cool, resulting in a slightly malleable coarse powder atroom temperature.

After cooling, 1.0 g mineral clay was stirred into the powdered mixture.

100 g of the final mixture were placed (at room temperature) into a 6.35cm compression cylinder with a convex base plate. The mixture was moldedby using a 20-ton hydraulic arbor press which pushed a machined pistonhead into the compression cylinder, thereby forming a cylindrical porousmatrix with a concave base. Eight equal-sized, 2-mm deep, pie-shapedreservoirs were pressed into the porous matrix by the piston head.

The final product was ejected from the base of the compression cylinder.

Example 1B

A porous matrix with an integrated rodent guard was made in thefollowing way:

A coarse powder mixture was prepared as described in Example 1A.However, before the molding step occurred, a 3.0 cm by 20.0 cm collar of⅛″ grid woven 27-gauge wire cloth was crimped to form a circle ofdiameter 6.35 cm. The circle was then sleeved inside the compressioncylinder flush with the convex base.

100 g of the powder mixture were placed (at room temperature) into thecompression cylinder. Upon application of piston pressure, the wire meshwas implanted into the outside layer of the finished cylindrical porousmatrix, barring removal and subsequent damage to the finished product.

The final product was ejected from the base of the compression cylinder.

Example 2

One hundred pest control systems were made in the following way:

Formation of Water-Soluble Feeding Stimulant:

Water-soluble feeding stimulant was prepared as follows:

1500 mL of water were brought to a boil.

22.5 mL of red food coloring was added to the water.

7200 grams of granulated sugar were dissolved in the water/food coloringsolution, and the resulting solution was heated (without agitation) to304° F. (151° C.), to reach the “hard crack” stage of molten sucrose.

The resultant mixture was poured onto a ⅛″ steel grid, and stirred ascooled to prevent clumping. The mixture was then pestled to a coarsepowder.

Formation of Sustained-Release Agent:

Sustained-release agent was prepared as follows:

875 grams of paraffin wax and 875 grams of carnauba (Brazil) wax wereco-melted and heated to 120° C.

45 mL of red liquid candlemaker's dye (from Lone Star Candle Co.) wasadded to the molten wax and stirred through.

The molten wax was poured over the cooled sugar mixture and stirreduntil cool.

Formation of Pest Control Systems:

Pest control systems were formed as follows:

11.25 grams of formulated Entrust (80% active spinosad) were stirredinto the cooled granular mixture.

90 grams of the mixture (at room temperature) and a pre-formed wire meshrodent guard were placed into a 7.5 cm compression cylinder with aconcave base.

Using a 26-30 ton hydraulic press, a machined flat-faced piston head waspushed into the compression cylinder, forming a dome-shaped porousmatrix embedded in the concave base plate.

The porous matrix was ejected from the concave base plate, and areservoir was drilled into the top of the porous matrix.

A ⅛ hole was drilled through the center of the porous matrix to receivea hanging screw.

The porous matrix was mounted on a hollow, prefabricated flat-toppedsphere to form the pest control system.

The pest control system formation process was repeated to form 100 pestcontrol systems total. The porous matrices of the pest control systemshad the following characteristics: Component Percentage Toxicant(Spinosad) 0.10% Inert 0.025%  Sugar 79.625%  Food Coloring agent (Red)0.25% Paraffin Wax 9.75% Carnauba Wax 9.75% Candlemaker's Dye (Red)0.50%

Characteristic Value Mass 87 grams Volume 68 cm³ Density 1.28 g/cm³ BaseDiameter 7.5 cm Height 2.0 cm Reservoir Capacity 1.0 mLTest Procedures

Simulated Rainfall Tests

For each of the simulated rainfall experiments, caps were mounted on 8.4cm spheres prior to rain exposure. The spheres were painted gloss whiteto allow maximum visual interpretation of sucrose coverage anddistribution.

A customized simulated rain chamber (with multiple-stage diffusers tosimulate in-canopy rainfall exposure) was used. The rain chambermeasured 60 cm (width)×60 cm (depth)×240 cm (height).

Five replicates of each tested treatment were exposed to 30 cm ofartificially generated rainfall in 2.54 cm increments. In all trials ofthese caps, rain was applied at the rate of 2.54 cm per hour. Tosimulate the periodic rains of summer field conditions, no more than 1hour of rainfall was applied per 24-hour period.

For each replicate of each treatment, all runoff water was collected inan individual catch basin. The runoff water was then tested for sucroseconcentration using a Brix scale assessed with an Atago refractometer(0-32%, ±0.1%).

Apple Maggot Fly Bioassays—Laboratory Trials Without Toxicant

Candidate cap styles were mounted on 8.4 cm spheres and exposed toartificially generated rainfall (as above).

At 5 cm increments (i.e., once 5 cm of rain had fallen on the caps),spheres were removed from the chamber and allowed to dry. Fifty flieswere introduced (individually) on spheres, and allowed to forage freelyfor a maximum of 600 seconds.

The total residence time and time spent feeding were recorded for eachfly.

Apple Maggot Fly Bioassays—Laboratory Trials With Toxicant-TreatedSpheres

Spheres (on which caps were mounted) were coated with black latex paintcontaining 4.0% (a.i.) imidacloprid, to kill flies alighting and feedingupon sphere surfaces.

The spheres were then placed in six commercial orchards in Massachusettsin a single quarter-acre plot in each orchard.

At the mid-point (6 weeks of field exposure) and end (12 weeks of fieldexposure) of the growing season, two spheres were returned to thelaboratory. The fly-killing power of these field-exposed spheres wasdirectly assessed by placing 20 flies (individually) on each sphere andallowing them to forage freely for a maximum of 600 seconds.

Residence time on the spheres was recorded for each fly, and themortality rates of tested flies were assessed 24, 48, and 72 hours aftertesting.

Apple Maggot Fly Field Trials (Crop Protection)

For commercial-orchard evaluations of trap effectiveness,toxicant-treated spheres (as above) fitted with sucrose caps were placedin six commercial orchards in Massachusetts.

Traps were assessed by placing spheres in perimeter trees surrounding asmall plot (˜49 trees per plot) in each orchard. Traps were placed 5meters apart and baited with butyl hexanoate.

Treatment effectiveness was assessed by weekly comparisons of numbers offeral apple maggot flies captured on sticky unbaited monitoring traps onthe interior of each plot and percent injury to fruit in samples takenevery other week throughout the growing season.

In each orchard, performance of spheres with sucrose caps was comparedwith performance of sticky-coated spheres, biodegradabletoxicant-treated spheres, and grower-applied whole-plot insecticidesprays.

Test Results

Samples Prepared

The following samples were prepared and used in testing:

-   -   A. Black or red wooden or plastic spheres with a diameter of        8.0-8.4 cm were treated with toxicant and fitted with one of the        following:        -   1. 3.8 cm diameter, 25 g cap formulated of molten sugar            alone (78% sucrose, 22% fructose)        -   2. 3.8 cm diameter, 25 g porous cap formulated of 85%            sucrose and 15% paraffin, formed under 2 tons of hydraulic            pressure        -   3. 5.0 cm diameter, 50 g porous cap formulated with 85%            sucrose and 15% paraffin, with 8 flutes shaped into the top            surface of the cap to ensure shedding of rainfall, formed            under 2 tons of hydraulic pressure        -   4. 5.0 cm diameter, 50 g porous cap formulated with 85%            sucrose and 15% paraffin with 8 shallow reservoirs pressed            (under 2 tons of pressure) into the top surface of the cap            to channel rainfall through the porous cap body        -   5. 6.3 cm diameter, 100 g porous cap formulated with 80%            sucrose and 20% paraffin with reservoirs as in (4), formed            under 20 tons of hydraulic pressure        -   6. 6.3 cm diameter, 150 g porous cap formulated with 80%            sucrose and 20% paraffin formed under 20 tons of pressure,            with reservoirs as in (4) and an integrated rodent guard        -   7. 6.3 cm diameter, 150 g porous cap formulated with 79%            sucrose, 10% paraffin, 10% carnauba wax, 1% mineral clay            formed under 20 tons of pressure with reservoirs as in (4)            and rodent guard as in (6)    -   B. Black or-red 7.7-8.4 cm-biodegradable (starch-based),        toxicant-treated spheres.    -   C. Black or red wooden or plastic 8.0-8.4 cm spheres coated with        a sticky substance (Tangletrap) to capture alighting flies.    -   D. Grower-applied, whole-plot treatment with phosmet or        azinphosmethyl 2-3 times during the growing season.        Comparative Test Results of Above Samples

Table 1—Cap A.3. vs. Cap A.4.—Sucrose Content in Runoff and on Sphere.Comparison of release of sucrose by two styles of wax/sugar caps (A.3.and A.4.). TABLE 1 Sugar (grams) in Sugar (mg/cm²) retained runoff wateron sphere Sphere Cap Style Sphere Cap Style Rainfall (inches) A.3. A.4.A.3. A.4. 1 4.95 2.55 3.3 11.3 2 5.97 1.85 2.7 7.0 3 5.27 1.69 2.5 5.3 46.17 1.54 2.4 4.5 5 5.22 1.45 2.2 4.4 6 3.76 1.27 1.7 4.2 7 2.43 1.161.1 3.9 8 1.70 1.14 0.8 3.8 Total (grams) 35.47 12.65 % Sugar Released83.5 29.8The results in Table 1 show that a porous matrix that was associatedwith an A.4. sphere released less sucrose than did a porous matrix thatwas associated with an A.3. sphere. The porous matrix that wasassociated with an A.3. sphere had flutes, but no reservoirs. The porousmatrix that was associated with an A.4. sphere had reservoirs, but noflutes.

Table 2—Capture of Flies and Fruit Injury for Different Caps. Capturesof feral apple maggot flies on unbaited monitoring traps and percentinjury to fruit by apple maggot in plots of apple trees in commercialorchards. In each case, the plot protection strategy listed representsthe sole management tactic targeting apple maggot flies in each plotfrom early July through harvest. TABLE 2 Plot protection strategy(above) A.4. B. C. D. Year 1 # AMF captured per plot* 38 55 53 37 %fruit injury per plot** 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.2 A.4. A.6. C. D. Year 2 # AMFcaptured per plot* 53 57 53 53 % fruit injury per plot** 0.38 0.13 0.170.13*Mean captures per trap on 4 unbaited traps on the interior of eachplot.**Based on 100-200 fruit sampled per plot bi-weekly from July throughSeptember.Table 2 shows the fly capture and fruit injury values associated withthe A.4. and A.6. porous matrices, in comparison to other controlstrategies (B, C, and D).

Table 3—Mortality of Flies for Different Spheres/Caps. Mortality ofapple maggot flies (AMF) after exposure to toxicant-treated spheres. Allspheres were retrieved from commercial orchards at the mid-point (6weeks field exposure) and end (12 weeks field exposure) of the fieldseason. AMF were exposed (individually) to each treatment and allowed toforage freely for 10 minutes. TABLE 3 AMF mortality (%) 72 hours afterexposure to: Spheres with Spheres without Duration of Field ToxicantToxicant Exposure Sugar Sugar (Sphere Cap Style) From Field* Added**From Field* Added** Year 1 (A.3.)  6 weeks 30.7 75.7 2.1 0.0 12 weeks41.4 75.0 0.0 3.0 Year 2 (A.4.)  6 weeks 37.0 96.0 2.0 0.0 12 weeks 39.0100.0 3.0 0.0 Year 3 (A.6.)  6 weeks 35.0 93.0 0.0 0.0 12 weeks 29.095.0 0.0 0.0*No additional treatment applied to spheres prior to testing.**20% aqueous sucrose solution applied to spheres prior to testing.The results in Table 3 show that toxicant-treated spheres associatedwith the A.4. and A.6. porous matrices exhibited higher fly mortalitythan did toxicant-treated spheres associated with the A.3. porous matrix(without a reservoir). Both the A.4. and the A.6. porous matrices hadreservoirs, while the A.3. porous matrix had flutes, but no reservoirs.Additionally, the A.6. porous matrix had an integrated rodent guard anda higher paraffin content than the other two matrices.

Table 4—Release of Sucrose by Different Caps. Comparison of release ofsucrose by three styles of wax/sugar caps (A.4., A.5., and A.6. (above))under simulated rainfall. TABLE 4 Sugar (grams) Sugar (mg/cm²) in runoffwater retained on sphere Sphere Cap Style Sphere Cap Style Rainfall(Inches) A.4. A.5. A.6. A.4. A.5. A.6. 1 7.04 9.26 8.86 16.3 21.4 20.5 28.45 7.65 6.04 19.5 17.7 13.9 3 5.39 4.83 4.63 12.5 11.1 10.7 4 4.635.23 8.45 10.7 12.1 19.5 5 2.82 3.22 5.63 6.5 7.4 13.0 6 2.62 1.81 3.426.1 4.2 7.9 7 1.61 1.81 5.84 3.7 4.2 13.5 8 1.81 1.61 7.24 4.2 3.7 16.79 1.61 1.81 3.02 3.7 4.2 7.0 10  1.20 1.41 3.22 2.8 3.3 7.4 11  0.800.80 2.01 1.8 1.8 4.6 12  0.80 1.00 1.81 1.8 2.3 4.2 Total (grams) 38.7840.44 60.17 % Sugar 96.9 50.6 50.1 ReleasedThe results in Table 4 show that over time, the porous matrices with ahigher percentage of paraffin wax (i.e., the porous matrices associatedwith spheres A.5. and A.6.) released less sugar than the porus matrixwith a lower percentage of paraffin wax (i.e., the porous matrixassociated with sphere A.4.).

Table 5—Cap Damage by Rodents. Percentage of sphere caps receivinggreater than 20% damage by nontarget (rodent) feeding, based onbi-weekly visual inspection of 180 caps of each type. TABLE 5 Spherecaps damaged by Duration of field rodent feeding (%) exposure (weeks)A.3. A.4.* A.6. 2 7.0 9.0 0.0 4 14.7 10.0 0.0 6 20.5 10.0 0.0 8 47.610.0 0.0 10 50.1 10.0 0.0 12 51.9 10.0 0.0*For field comparison, an external wire rodent guard was added to capstyle A.4.The results in Table 5 show that an A.6. porous matrix, which had arodent guard, was not damaged at all by rodents. By contrast, A.3. andA.4. porous matrices, which did not have rodent guards, were damaged byrodents. In the case of the A.3. porous matrix, rodent damage wassubstantial.

Table 6—Cap Resistance to Heat Degradation. Cap resistance todegradation under high heat conditions (50°-55° C.). Comparison of twocap styles (A.6 and A.7., above) and an intermediate (A.6.*). Capsexposed to high heat conditions daily for 30 days. TABLE 6 Sphere % Loss(mass) Cap Style % Paraffin % Carnauba % Sucrose after exposure A.6. 200 80 74.0 A.6.* 15 5 80 41.0 A.7. 10 10 80 31.3 Sphere Loss to rainfallLoss to heat Projected field Cap Style (grams) (grams) % Waste life(weeks) A.6. 28.0 83.0 55.3 5.8 A.6.* 28.0 33.0 22.0 10.4 A.7 28.0 19.012.7 13.7*5% paraffin replaced with 5% carnauba wax as an intermediate stepbetween cap styles A.6. and A.7.The results in Table 6 show that porous matrices containing a mixture ofparaffin and carnauba wax exhibited less degradation under high heatconditions and had a longer projected field life than a porous matrixcontaining just paraffin wax.

Other Embodiments

It is to be understood that while the invention has been described inconjunction with the detailed description thereof, the foregoingdescription is intended to illustrate and not limit the scope of theinvention, which is defined by the scope of the appended claims. Otheraspects, advantages, and modifications are within the scope of thefollowing claims.

1. A feeding stimulant release system, comprising: a porous matrixcomprising a water-soluble or water-dispersible feeding stimulant, aninsoluble sustained-release agent, and at least one reservoir located onan upper surface of the porous matrix, wherein the feeding stimulant andthe release agent comprise two homogenous phases dispersed in eachother.
 2. The feeding stimulant release system of claim 1, wherein theporous matrix further comprises a toxicant.
 3. The feeding stimulantrelease system of claim 2, wherein the porous matrix is in the shape ofa fruit or nut mimic.
 4. The feeding stimulant release system of claim2, wherein the porous matrix is in the shape of a sphere.
 5. The feedingstimulant release system of claim 4, wherein the sphere is hollow. 6.The feeding stimulant release system of claim 1, wherein the depth ofthe reservoir is less than about eight millimeters.
 7. The feedingstimulant release system of claim 1, wherein the porous matrix comprisesbetween about six and about ten reservoirs.
 8. The feeding stimulantrelease system of claim 1, wherein the porous matrix comprises onereservoir.
 9. The feeding stimulant release system of claim 1, whereinthe feeding stimulant comprises sucrose.
 10. The feeding stimulantrelease system of claim 1, wherein the sustained-release agent compriseswax.
 11. The feeding stimulant release system of claim 10, wherein thewax comprises carnauba wax, paraffin wax, or a combination thereof. 12.The feeding stimulant release system of claim 11, wherein thesustained-release agent comprises between about 60% and about 90%paraffin wax.
 13. The feeding stimulant release system of claim 12,wherein the sustained-release agent comprises about 80% paraffin wax.14. The feeding stimulant release system of claim 11, wherein thesustained-release agent comprises between about 10% and about 40%carnauba wax.
 15. The feeding stimulant release system of claim 14,wherein the sustained-release agent comprises about 20% carnauba wax.16. The feeding stimulant release system of claim 1, further comprisinga mesh layer disposed around the porous matrix.
 17. The feedingstimulant release system of claim 16, wherein the mesh layer compriseswire cloth.
 18. The feeding stimulant release system of claim 1, whereinthe porous matrix further comprises a coloring agent.
 19. The feedingstimulant release system of claim 1, further comprising a toxicant. 20.The feeding stimulant release system of claim 1, wherein the porousmatrix is hemispherical.
 21. The feeding stimulant release system ofclaim 1, wherein the porous matrix is cylindrical.
 22. A pest controlsystem, comprising: a fruit or nut mimic including a toxicant; and aporous matrix of claim
 1. 23. The pest control system of claim 22,wherein the toxicant comprises imidacloprid.
 24. The pest control systemof claim 22, wherein the toxicant comprises spinosad.
 25. The pestcontrol system of claim 22, wherein the porous matrix further comprisesa toxicant.
 26. The pest control system of claim 25, wherein thetoxicant in the porous matrix is the same as the toxicant in the fruitor nut mimic.
 27. The pest control system of claim 25, wherein thetoxicant in the porous matrix is different from the toxicant in thefruit or nut mimic.
 28. A method of making a porous matrix for use in afeeding stimulant release system, the method comprising: (a) combining awater-soluble or water-dispersible feeding stimulant with an insolublesustained-release agent; (b) forming the combination into a porousmatrix, wherein the feeding stimulant and the release agent comprise twohomogenous phases dispersed in each other; and (c) forming at least onereservoir in the porous matrix.
 29. The method of claim 1, furthercomprising adding a toxicant to the combination.
 30. A method of pestcontrol, the method comprising: (a) obtaining a pest control system ofclaim 22; (b) disposing the porous matrix of the system above the fruitor nut mimic; and (c) placing the system in an area containing pests.31. A pest control system, comprising: a fruit or nut mimic comprising aporous matrix of claim
 1. 32. The pest control system of claim 31,wherein the porous matrix is hemispherical.
 33. The pest control systemof claim 32, further comprising a bottom portion that is attached to theporous matrix.
 34. The pest control system of claim 33, wherein thebottom portion is hemispherical.
 35. The pest control system of claim33, wherein the bottom portion comprises a plastic, a wood, or a metal.